Why fears about Muslim integration into Western society--propagated opportunistically by some on the right--misread history and misunderstand multiculturalism. In the United States and in Europe, politicians, activists, and even some scholars argue that Islam is incompatible with Western values and that we put ourselves at risk if we believe that Muslim immigrants can integrate into our society. Norway's Anders Behring Breivik took this argument to its extreme and murderous conclusion in July 2011. Meanwhile in the United States, state legislatures' efforts to ban the practice of Islamic law, or sharia, are gathering steam--despite a notable lack of evidence that sharia poses any real threat.
In Blaming Islam, John Bowen uncovers the myths about Islam and Muslim integration into Western society, with a focus on the histories, policy, and rhetoric associated with Muslim immigration in Europe, the British experiment with sharia law for Muslim domestic disputes, and the claims of European and American writers that Islam threatens the West. Most important, he shows how exaggerated fears about Muslims misread history, misunderstand multiculturalism's aims, and reveal the opportunism of right wing parties who draw populist support by blaming Islam.
Respectable efforts from an anthropologist's perspective to put Islam back in a broader historical context than what our contemporaries are most attuned to--the ongoing everyday life, in hope of clearing some misapprehensions that have been unjustly imposed on the more reasonable of the Islamic group, which the author tries to help us see are as many as there are in any other religious groups.
My problem is I can more easily draw a fatalistic conclusion following the anthropologists' argument that human society has always worked by oppositions, than having a better idea of what could be done to help with the ever-worsening situation (another terrorist attack happened in New York just days ago), because the author doesn't seem to be coming from a place where more weight is put on assessing and putting forth public policies to cope with what he's interested in: the consequences of collective human actions.
I consider it a bad sign when my first thought about a book is "This guy would not have passed basic college composition." While the bits I could follow were moderately interesting, they were unfortunately drowned in a sea of florid prose that sounded very scholarly but failed utterly at comprehensibility. I managed to figure out some of the flood through intent consideration, though not all, and I gave up about a third of the way through when I found myself thinking "Is it worth my time to finish this?" For a book under 120 pages that should have taken at most a day to read, I figured that wondering about it probably meant I shouldn't bother. As the book seems to be an attempt to alleviate fear of Islam in the general population, this writing style seems counter-productive. However, said aim was not actually spelled out at any point, and it's possible my inference from the summary and introduction was wrong. However, if you're looking for an introduction to how Islam is viewed in Western politics, I'd look elsewhere.
Critical, insightful and enjoyable read. Along with any book by Richard Bulliet, this book by Bowen is the best rebuttal to Huntington's Clash of Civilisation theory...clash of civilisation what clash? so hilarious as this book clearly shows! I don't know how some people intelligence would lead them to write something like 'accusing Muslim immigrants of lowering the intelligence of German society!' So funny and the funnier is those who take such statement as a fact!
Easy to read but missing a more in-depth analysis why Europe has so many problems with dealing with immigration. However, at the beginning it was thought to be only an article about why the "multiculturalism" is not working in Europe and, therefore, it should be considered as a good start for a more detailed discussion on the mentioned issues.